Tag: crime

My post yesterday had put lots of knots in many Opposition supporters’ (Penyokong Pembangkang or PEPEK for short) knickers, it seems. Some questioned why is it that they cannot find reference to some of the things I had written.

The answer is simple – I attended the talk by US Supreme Court Advocate Appellate Tom Goldstein. So did some others whom I saw, like Azmi Arshad, blog owner of Another Brick In The Wall, Tun Faisal of JASA, members of the media (both mainstream and electronic).

The talk was supposed to start at 9am and was to finish at 11am as the auditorium was to be used by another session. Tom arrived late, around 10.25am and was given only half an hour to speak with five minutes of Q&A session. Among the questions asked during the very short Q&A session were “Does the US plan to do away with the jury system in its trials” and “The 1MDB is a civil forfeiture suit, why is there now a criminal action being pursued”.

Both were answered by Tom as per the media reports. And then it was announced that they had to cut the session short because the auditorium had been booked for another programme.

Tom was ushered into a meeting room where he and the Dean of the Faculty of Law had their coffee break, together with some UiTM staff. The media chaps were ushered to a different place to have their food. Only Tun Faisal, a journalist from The Mole, and I, managed to bring our food and sat at the same table with Tom. Tun Faisal and I asked the questions on IPIC, SRC and 1MDB where Tom mentioned the complexity of the case and why there is absolutely no progress whatsoever – the complainants who are in no way linked to 1MDB lodged a complaint with the US Department of Justice saying that money had been siphoned from the 1MDB, to which the 1MDB had denied losing any money. So to whom should the money be returned to if no one has lost any?

And to this I asked Tom if this is the reason it has taken the DoJ so long to actually initiate something, he answered with a simple, “Yes.” In other words, the probe has come to a standstill. The only reason they have asked a stay on the civil investigation and changed it to a criminal one is to NOT allow any of the money to be spent. To date, no one has been named as criminal defendants, not one charge has been filed, and not one targetted to be investigated on a criminal charge.

Which brings me to this: the Attorney-General of the US, in his speech at the Global Forum on Asset Recovery in Washington DC yesterday said that 1MDB is kleptocracy at its worst.

The headline that had gotten all the PEPEKs wet

Mr Sessions said that allegedly corrupt officials and their associates had reportedly used the 1MDB funds for a “lavish spending spree” such as US$200 million for real estate in South California and New York, US$130 million in artwork, US$100 million in an American music label and a US$265 million yacht.

1MDB officials allegedly laundered more than US$4.5 billion in total, he said, through a complex web of opaque transactions and shell companies with bank accounts in various countries such as Switzerland, Singapore, Luxembourg and the US.

This is nothing new. This is something we have heard which was read live on cable TV by Mr Sessions’s predecesor. And this brings me to a question – if this is so, why hasn’t the US DoJ taken any action for the past year and a half? This only underscores what Tom Goldstein had said – the complaint said the money was siphoned from 1MDB, but the 1MDB said they have not lost a single cent. So, whose money did these “1MDB officials” siphon?

Those assets have been frozen since mid-2016 and still have not been returned to 1MDB. Why is that? All the people that have been charged, tried and sent to jail for laundering “1MDB money” in Singapore and elsewhere in the world were bank employees who flouted the local financial regulations. Yet, not a single 1MDB employee has ever been charged in those courts. Why?

PEPEKs are dancing today thinking that something new had been revealed, when it is just old news being repeated. No doubt that they money and assets the US DoJ confiscated last year represents kleptocracy at its worst. But what has that to do with 1MDB? Can we have the money back now if they are 1MDB’s?

The PEPEKs think that they have won the argument, but really they are just dry PEPEKs, giving an erectile dysfunction to the celebration.

It is unbelievably that the DAP leadership would not know the Elections Act as well as the Federal Constitution’s articles on taking up another country’s citizenship.

But of course the DAP is in the business of duping the rakyat into believing that it is fighting for the rakyat when all they want is the power and to be in positions where they can make money out of the rakyat.

Else why should there be fundraising dinners to fund Empurau dishes and also a RM305 million never-completed study for a tunnel?

DAP is just a bed of crooks, and those who voted for them a a bunch of stupid monkeys.

The police does not require a report in order to look into the deals of the 1MDB. However, given that others agencies including the Auditor-General’s office is still probing the company, it is only appropriate for the police to await the outcome of the probe. If there is an element of wrong-doing, it becomes a crime and it would be much better for the police to step in then.

However, I would take a step further to also probe past deals involving GLCs to see if there had been abuse of power as well as misappropriation of GLC funds.

The latest incident involving a Warrant Officer of the Malaysian Armed Forces attached to the Malaysian High Commission in New Zealand who was arrested on 9th May for attempted burglary and sexual assault is one that is both simple but complex in nature, but comes with a simple solution.

The crime may not be as bad as the crimes committed by Arjen Rudd, the South African diplomat in the blockbuster movie “Lethal Weapon 2” (played by Joss Ackland) nor is it as bad as an incident involving the Ambassador of Myanmar to Sri Lanka, but the crimes committed by this Warrant Officer warrants a serious action. In all the instances above, the clause “Diplomatic Immunity” was invoked.

Contrary to popular belief, Article 37 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations says that as long as you are a member of the Embassy staff, you are entitled to the immunities prescribed in Articles 29 thru 36; and this includes spouse, children, maids, servants working there, plus minus one or two articles for non-staff. The Warrant Officer is a diplomatic agent, and under Article 29 he is inviolable: he cannot be prosecuted for any crime committed in the Receiving State which, in this case, is New Zealand.

As in the case of the Myanmar Ambassador to Sri Lanka, the Ambassador in 1979 suspected his wife of having an affair, shot her. Then, on the grounds of the Embassy, he built a funeral pyre and cremated his wife in full view of the police, media and the public AND STILL REMAINED AN AMBASSADOR! This is how strong Article 29 is.

The Warrant Officer was brought back to Malaysia on the 22nd of May after the Malaysian High Commission invoked the man’s diplomatic immunity. On the 29th May, the Malaysian Armed Forces convened a. Board of Inquiry into the incident, and none of us would have known of this until someone in New Zealand kicked up so much fuss to not notice!

Is it right, however, to not send him back to New Zealand to face charges?

The Government of Malaysia should use Article 32 para 1 of the Convention to waive his diplomat status and express this waiver as prescribed in Para 2 of the same Article. Then send this guy back to. New Zealand to dance to the tune he had asked for, while the Foreign Ministry work on repairing the damage done.

We cannot ignore nor condone blatant criminal acts by our civil servants or by any individual of the public, especially when in other countries. We should not jeopardise Malaysia’s reputation abroad just for the sake of one criminal.

Therefore, I call upon Anifah Aman to do the right thing: crucify the Warrant Officer and stop this diplomatic insanity!

As Malaysia approaches its 50th year, I cannot help but think that while being in its infancy this nation is ageing far too fast and is fast being tired of itself. The cohesiveness of its people in the run up to the events on the 31st August, 1957 and 16th September, 1963 is fast coming undone. Many a times have I written on how far more cohesive we were immediately after the 13th May, 1969 tragedy than we are now, despite claims of how far more mature we are in the political sense. That may be true, but we behave like immature kids behaving like we are politically mature.

Elements once found destructive, such as Communism, is now being looked up to. A few days ago, left-leaning students were audience in a forum that had a former member of the all-but-defunct Communist Party of Indonesia, and students were seen wearing t-shirts glorifying Tan Malaka, a Marxist who once lived in Indonesia. To add insult to injury, Karpal Singh has also been reported as supporting the move to allow former leader of the Communist Party of Malaya, Chin Peng, to return to Malaysia. Of course, humanitarians would argue that there is nothing wrong with allowing an octogenarian back to the land he was born in, and liberals would think the same. I hope these same people would also condemn Israel for still hunting former Nazis and tell the people of Cambodia they should forgive the Khmer Rouge.

For whatever reasons too did the police not act previously on criminal elements. The removal of the ISA and the Emergency Ordinance rendered the police virtually helpless in its fight against crime, let alone be able to maintain peace and order and breathe at the same time. Kudos to the good teamwork of the present Inspector-General of Police and the new Minister of Home Affairs. We have not seen this kind of teamwork since the days of Tun Dr Ismail – Tun Salleh, and Tun Ghazali Shafie – Tun Haniff days.

I have read comments from politicians from both sides of the political fence who are against giving the police emergency powers and say that the police should learn from their British counterparts on how to police the law without having firearms. Britain, for those who did not study geography, is an island, unlike Malaysia that has land borders with neighbours. A simple ferry or train ride from the European continent requires passengers and luggages to be scanned. My former college mate who is now a Chief Inspector in the Thames Valley Police lamented how he sometimes wish he was given a gun, especially in the wake of the two incidents where two women constables were gunned down by armed criminals. Imagine our police fighting crime with porous borders.

The introduction of the proposed Criminal Prevention Act should hopefully allow the police to conduct interdiction strikes on hardcore crime gangs. This Act will allow the police to hold criminal elements for up to 70 days pending trial. I have not seen the draft in full but I am sure it will uphold the rights of those who want peace.

Was there political interference in the police’s operations before the new Minister and Inspector-General came into office? I would leave that to the former Inspector-Generals to answer. But I know a gangster was awarded one of the highest Federal titles. How his name had made it through police vetting definitely puzzles me.

I know for sure there are politicians from both sides of the political fence whom have been seen with criminal elements, and photographs of these politicians meeting with criminals exist. These are prominent politicians and I know the police has full knowledge of this. Whether their presence with the criminals is for political or for personal reasons, only they and the police can answer this.

Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar once remarked that the BERSIH rally had communist elements involved. I would not be at all surprised if there are members of the CPM whom have made it into political parties, as they did before 13th May, 1969. Today, we have former police Director of CID Tan Sri Zaman Khan saying that an ex-convict who was a triad chief is also holding a lower office in a political party in Penang (NST, Nation page 25, 5th September 2013).

Ironically, the same can be said of the young politicians mentioned above, and of most politicians too. I certainly hope the Home Minister will give all the support the police needs in making this nation a safer place to live in.

At 50, Malaysia is already more divisive than it should be. Political fanatics are to be blamed. With the underworld and subversive elements making a breakthrough, it will not be long before our children begin to face the mistakes we have all made. Criminals, subversive elements, politicians with links to the underworld should never be allowed to represent the people of Malaysia, and I urge the Malaysian people to reject them and reject those who protect them. If we don’t, we won’t see Malaysia living past 100.

Within the hour of writing this posting, the Australian Foreign Minister, Bob Carr, will be issuing a statement on the denial of entry of Independent Senator Nicholas Xenophon into Malaysia. According to some friends in Australia, “they have made it into such a big thing over here.”

Perhaps, news agencies in Australia, in particular Sky News Australia, should stop being superficial as their superficial reporting shows their inability to engage in journalistic rigor, comprehend complexity or maintain impartiality. Else their journos could come and join me write for this blog pro bono perhaps in the classifieds section. Well, I have no classifieds section.

Now, please understand the following:

Xenophon is being denied entry for being a “security threat” to Malaysia. Let us not forget that Xenophon, as an Australian diplomat, broke local law for being directly involved in the BERSIH 3.0 demonstration. The Malaysian Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 specifically mentions in Section 4(2)(a) that a person commits an offence if being a non-citizen, he organizes or participates in an assembly and should be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand Ringgit. Of course, being Malaysian and hospitable even to foreign lawbreakers, he was allowed to go home without receiving much hassle, let alone a 10 sen fine.

Isn’t Xenophon then a diplomat, and are diplomats not immune from prosecution?

Firstly, Article 41 para 1 of the Geneva Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 clearly states that it is the duty of all persons enjoying the privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State and have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that State. Xenophon went against that by getting involved in the BERSIH 3.0 rally.

Xenophon has always maintained that his interest in free and fair elections in Malaysia started with the prosecution and subsequent acquittal of Anwar Ibrahim of the sodomy charge in Sodomy 2.0 (yes, we Malaysians have a release number for everything). It does not mean that he did not do it. As in Sodomy 1.0, Anwar was acquitted due to technical reasons and not because he did not participate in acts of sodomy. Read the last four paragraphs of this report.

Perhaps, Sky News Australia should ask itself if there is no thriving democracy in Malaysia, how is it that demonstrations are allowed, and if elections aren’t free and fair, how was it possible that Anwar’s loose coalition won five of Malaysia’s states including two of Malaysia’s cash cow states (Penang and Selangor)?

Judging from Foreign Minister Bob Carr’s statement on the issue as well as reports by other Australian news agencies, Australia values its good relation with Malaysia, but it is the minority and people who get little backing from the Australian government such as Nick Xenophon, and Foxtel-owned Sky News Australia that continue to believe in the lies dished out by Anwar Ibrahim. I hope they make time to interview all the founding members of Anwar’s Parti Keadilan Rakyat where even Anwar’s membership is a suspect. All his comrades who joined him in 1998 have left save for his wife, daughter and his trusted lieutenant whose wife is reported to have had an affair with Anwar when the latter was still a Federal Minister. And Xenophon’s constant meddling in the affairs of another State not only contravenes the Geneva Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961, but also displays his standard of being a diplomat against that of seasoned diplomats who would shy away from giving comments about their host State knowing the line that has been drawn by Article 41 of that Convention.

As such, Malaysia has the right to declare Nick Xenophon a persona non grata under Article 9 of the same Convention, and list him as an undesired person. Australia as the sending State has no choice but to recall the person. We, including Australian journalists, must remember that Article 9 of the Convention allows Malaysia to even declare Xenophon a non grata without explanation, and even before he arrives in Malaysian territory.

You have your laws, we have ours. if you want others to respect your laws, learn to respect the laws of others. You did not respect ours, Xenophon, now off you go.